By David Clarke, FCBS
Premature Purchase: Many companies rush to buy software before they fully understand their compliance or risk management needs. The tool may end up solving the wrong problem, creating inefficiencies.
Requirements should be defined and then the tools evaluated to determine their appropriateness - as I said yesterday, the tol / platform needs to be the servant not the dictator.
Lock-In: When tools / platforms / software is purchased before the requirements are clearly defines, then the organization may end up being forced to adopt the built-in frameworks, templates etc which may not align with their specific business or operational requirements. Once locked into these frameworks, changing processes becomes complex and costly.
Inflexibility: often the platform dictates (that word again) how processes should run, making it hard to adapt to specific organizational needs or unique risk landscapes. Instead of enhancing existing processes, these tools force organizations to mold their processes to fit the software, which is counterproductive. Dictator not Servant.
False Sense of Security: Organizations may believe, mistakenly, that software alone will solve their compliance and risk management problems. (Imagine a big horn/ alarm sounding here). However, without clear understanding and proper control implementation, no software can automate judgment-based decisions. Relying too heavily on the platform may lead to compliance gaps and inefficiencies.
Focus on Tools, Not on Processes: Too much emphasis on GRC tools can distract from the essential work of defining clear, effective processes and control structures. Tools should supplement processes, not replace them. Processes and strategies must come first, with technology only serving to accelerate or enhance them (servant!)
Wasted Resources: Purchasing expensive software without understanding how it will fit into the overall strategy results in wasted time, effort, and money. Some companies sign up for long-term contracts, only to find that they use a fraction of the tool’s capabilities or, worse, abandon it entirely because it’s not fit for purpose.
Strategic Misalignment: Organizations can become so focused on implementing software that they lose sight of their original goals: designing and implementing effective controls. The tool can shift focus from meaningful objectives like managing risk and ensuring compliance, resulting in a misaligned strategy that wastes resources and slows progress.
Stuck at Implementation Phase: Companies often find that they are unable to progress beyond initial stages of compliance, such as hitting 70% in control readiness, because they focus on the tool rather than addressing the underlying system design and implementation of controls. Tools alone can’t resolve process or strategic shortcomings.
Overcommitment to Software Contracts: Many companies find themselves stuck in multi-year software contracts that don't meet their needs. The tool is often underutilized, creating a burden on the business rather than helping it improve compliance or risk management. The cost of switching or cancelling can be prohibitive, leaving the company reliant on an inefficient solution.
Human Dependency: No tool can replace human expertise. GRC software can help automate evidence collection or report generation, but without skilled professionals who understand the broader compliance landscape and how to interpret and act on data, the software itself becomes ineffective. People and processes must lead the way, with software as a supportive tool.
Summary:
GRC software problems often stem from premature purchase decisions, lock-in to ineffective frameworks, inflexibility, a false sense of security, and overreliance on tools instead of focusing on strategy and process first. Companies waste resources and time when they buy GRC software without clearly understanding their needs, which leads to poor implementation and misalignment with their compliance objectives. Tools should serve the organization, not dictate its processes.
Commentaires